What are you talking about? The Big East could still hold a CCG w/o ECU being an all sports member. They'd have 12 (assuming they add Tulsa) w/ Navy/ECU as fb onlys. Adding ECU as an all sports member does nothing else for their football it only helps/hurts their other sports like I wrote above.

Ok. But where would ECU find a new conference for their other sports while becoming a fb-only member in the Big East? Oh, how about adding Army as a fb-only as well? Also having Georgetown and Villanova upgrading to FBS and join as fb-onlys too.

Discussions of Army are a Realignment 101 issue. Army has been invited to the Big East, many times over the past decades. But they have passed each time. Most recently, last year when they again were invited. Army lef CUSA because they could not compete at a high enough level for football. Being that the Big East is just a rebranded CUSA with Uconn and Temple, why would they all of a sudden change their stance? They wouldn't.

Army has an open invite. When they want to join, they will. But it won't be an issue that the Big East fails to invite them since they already have.

...and that number is propped up greatly by Navy football and UConn basketball, the only aspects of national worth; also the first two components likely to depart the soonest.

We saw it coming. Temple, Memphis, SMU, and Tulane football aren't worth a dime no matter where they are located on a map.

And likely Cincy fb too...

The Big Question is, does that number entice Tulsa enough to come on board. I think the number is a bit more than CUSA (I'd love to see it on paper though) and the schools are more similar to Tulsa so I assume they'll switch. But I think with that pricing the conference will stop once they get a CCG.

Personally I'm hoping Navy bails and they can add another all sports member in the West for a cleaner E/W split which also will help out the scheduling and sponsoring of many other sports. So Miss & Rice would be options 1 and 2.

So Miss while in a weak market but has better than average fb and does make a solid the trio w/ Tulane/Memphis which would bring in a lot of regional attention above everyone but the SEC.

Rice would obviously just be an attempt to lock down the Houston market (and also serve as collateral in case UH ever decides the MWC would be a better home, especially after their contract is renegotiated in a few years) and is also an AAU university which would be an attempt to make some of these presidents happy after the disappointing TV contract.

In addition, I read this on a UTEP message board....if Navy stays any chance that the nBE still add another all sports school for 12, and tries to get another fb only?

UTEP, while not that great at football, would be one of the few schools that could split up their sports and sdave money.

By putting fb in the nBE and their other sports in the MWC as an offset for fb only Hawaii (if they would allow it) they would save money on travel (seeing how fb requires lots of travel (personel, equipment, fans) and would be cheaper to fly to the major cities in the East, and other sports require less travel and would be cheaper to fly to the closer yet more remote desitnations in the West.

Now I doubt this would ever happen but I found it an interesting idea, none the less as it helps both the nBE even out fb numbers and the MWC even out bb numbers (plus a travel partner for UNM and would move Boise to the West in all sports like they would prefer) and re-attaches UTEP with plently of old rivalries in both conferences.

This conference never went about things the right way when it came to expansion. They learned better than anyone that football drove the model, and that where better revenue opportunities existed, basketball was designated a second-class citizen.

This conference needed "good" football, regardless of where it was located. That's ECU and USM, but it's also UTEP and Tulsa. I can't say I would have turned down Memphis, as they belonged with what was the Big East some years ago (and certainly before UCF and SMU), but I would have never gone to Tulane before USM or NIU, even if Tulane ranks among my "most likely" expansion candidates in the B12 and ACC. The Big East got WAY ahead of themselves.

I would still put money on BYU and the old WAC gang reforming a conference with the pickings of their choice. No need for a SJSU when a Houston or Cincinnati are still out there.

The odd thing is that the Big East with basketball AND football is 10 million a year less than what Fox is offerring the likes of Nova, Gtown, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Marquette, Depaul, and Providence which only has basketball.

This conference never went about things the right way when it came to expansion. They learned better than anyone that football drove the model, and that where better revenue opportunities existed, basketball was designated a second-class citizen.

This conference needed "good" football, regardless of where it was located. That's ECU and USM, but it's also UTEP and Tulsa. I can't say I would have turned down Memphis, as they belonged with what was the Big East some years ago (and certainly before UCF and SMU), but I would have never gone to Tulane before USM or NIU, even if Tulane ranks among my "most likely" expansion candidates in the B12 and ACC. The Big East got WAY ahead of themselves.

I would still put money on BYU and the old WAC gang reforming a conference with the pickings of their choice. No need for a SJSU when a Houston or Cincinnati are still out there.

I'd put money that they won't. For one BYU thinks they're above their former conf and will always be bitter that Utah got to go to the PAC. 2nd, Forming a "new" conf. w/ 10 of 12 MWC members, BYU, Houston, Cincy, is the MWC kicking out 2 schools for no reason(won't happen) and replacing them. If Cincy, Houston, BYU wanted in, we'd just add them plus SMU for 16.

The odd thing is that the Big East with basketball AND football is 10 million a year less than what Fox is offerring the likes of Nova, Gtown, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Marquette, Depaul, and Providence which only has basketball.

The odd thing is that the Big East with basketball AND football is 10 million a year less than what Fox is offerring the likes of Nova, Gtown, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Marquette, Depaul, and Providence which only has basketball.

BE basketball is more watchable than CUSA errr nBE fb/bball

Yup. There's history and pedigree with that group. Not so much with CUSA-lite.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

I'd put money that they won't. For one BYU thinks they're above their former conf and will always be bitter that Utah got to go to the PAC. 2nd, Forming a "new" conf. w/ 10 of 12 MWC members, BYU, Houston, Cincy, is the MWC kicking out 2 schools for no reason(won't happen) and replacing them. If Cincy, Houston, BYU wanted in, we'd just add them plus SMU for 16.

I agree about BYU's bitterness, but I don't think *all* of the MWC gang get tapped. I could see a Boise, New Mexico, or UNLV getting left behind. When you consider who would be on the board: Cincy, UConn, Navy, USF, Houston...that's a pretty decent "eastern" front. Peg that with the "usuals" (BYU, Wyoming, CSU, Air Force, maybe SDSU), and now you have something that's marketable.

Aresco inherited a mess. The schools and leaders that made so many unwise decisions over a couple of decades are mostly all gone. The BE/nBE being a top conference essentially crashed a few year back. Still, there are members/new members that need something viable. There's no choice but to re-build and find stability. TV value shall start low, and they shall have to strive for enhancements based on what they shall have.

The C-7 would have a revenue advantage in the immediate future based on bb. It's a "collective entity" with well-established rivalries in urban markets that has not lost tradition. The MSG association has been a key factor.

The nBE should only be concerned with the comparisons to the C-7 as it negotiates the terms for, hopefully, an amiable divorce.

The odd thing is that the Big East with basketball AND football is 10 million a year less than what Fox is offerring the likes of Nova, Gtown, Seton Hall, St. Johns, Marquette, Depaul, and Providence which only has basketball.

BE basketball is more watchable than CUSA errr nBE fb/bball

Yup. There's history and pedigree with that group. Not so much with CUSA-lite.

Fresno St. Alum wrote:

I'd put money that they won't. For one BYU thinks they're above their former conf and will always be bitter that Utah got to go to the PAC. 2nd, Forming a "new" conf. w/ 10 of 12 MWC members, BYU, Houston, Cincy, is the MWC kicking out 2 schools for no reason(won't happen) and replacing them. If Cincy, Houston, BYU wanted in, we'd just add them plus SMU for 16.

I agree about BYU's bitterness, but I don't think *all* of the MWC gang get tapped. I could see a Boise, New Mexico, or UNLV getting left behind. When you consider who would be on the board: Cincy, UConn, Navy, USF, Houston...that's a pretty decent "eastern" front. Peg that with the "usuals" (BYU, Wyoming, CSU, Air Force, maybe SDSU), and now you have something that's marketable.

The old WAC already formed a new conference. It's called the Mountain West. The only mistake was kicking out UTEP and Hawaii when they did it. Wyoming, CSU and AFA will not consider kicking out New Mexico. Personally, if a team needed to be kicked out, my choice would be SDSU.

The idea of the MWC adding UConn, Cincy, Navy USF and Houston is sillier than the Big East adding Boise State, SDSU, and whoever else they had delusions of adding.

The old WAC already formed a new conference. It's called the Mountain West. The only mistake was kicking out UTEP and Hawaii when they did it. Wyoming, CSU and AFA will not consider kicking out New Mexico. Personally, if a team needed to be kicked out, my choice would be SDSU.

The idea of the MWC adding UConn, Cincy, Navy USF and Houston is sillier than the Big East adding Boise State, SDSU, and whoever else they had delusions of adding.

It's not "adding" anything. It's a few schools from the core of the old WAC/MWC splitting and then merging with some of the "chasers" in the east and midwest. It's "Mountain West Part II."

There is an opportunity here now to make something new, because who's presently where is not making the money they want, nor are they in amongst institutions they consider their peers. C-USA is NOT the same as it once was...neither is MWC (and I think THAT is why BYU no longer walks among them).

I don't know...I think there's material here for another mid-major conference that takes "the best of the rest," and rids itself of the Temple's, UCF's, USU's, and Tulane's who just aren't worth it.

The old WAC already formed a new conference. It's called the Mountain West. The only mistake was kicking out UTEP and Hawaii when they did it. Wyoming, CSU and AFA will not consider kicking out New Mexico. Personally, if a team needed to be kicked out, my choice would be SDSU.

The idea of the MWC adding UConn, Cincy, Navy USF and Houston is sillier than the Big East adding Boise State, SDSU, and whoever else they had delusions of adding.

It's not "adding" anything. It's a few schools from the core of the old WAC/MWC splitting and then merging with some of the "chasers" in the east and midwest. It's "Mountain West Part II."

There is an opportunity here now to make something new, because who's presently where is not making the money they want, nor are they in amongst institutions they consider their peers. C-USA is NOT the same as it once was...neither is MWC (and I think THAT is why BYU no longer walks among them).

I don't know...I think there's material here for another mid-major conference that takes "the best of the rest," and rids itself of the Temple's, UCF's, USU's, and Tulane's who just aren't worth it.

The nBE basically tried this, w/ the best school and the best market in the MWC, plus later offered UNLV, Fresno after AFA said no. It didn't work. We are red headed step children, nBE just found out they had red hair too. The money aint there for the cost of all sports travel. Regional works better for both nBE and MWC.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum